Well,
just a flash about it then I will stop tyhe thread, i would be more happy to
have my Quadra running BSD than nowing something about linus brains. (btw,
no one gave me clues about running BSD on those machines and yes i am quite
sure that Linux68k made progress. Unfortunately myself am still at the
beginning of programming (but i will better, i promise).

Linus Torvalds criticized OS X very hard, and Darwin OS underneath. In fact
he attacked sharp the Mach kernel, saying it is a bloated piece of crap
which throws away performance.
AFAIK Mach 3 is a good thing. I also used MkLinux (if Linus just remebered
that one...) which is OK as well as MachTen. One of the bes OS's ever was
NeXT and it had Mach2.5 and OS/2 too.
What gains a double-lernel system can give I don't know. I read sadly that
it looses up to 20% performance (that was for MkLinux)
SO I don't know, but surely he was stupidly biased.

bye

ric
on 5/9/01 1:36 AM, Cameron Kaiser at spectre@stockholm.ptloma.edu wrote:

>> how is the situation with Mac IIfx and the Quadra 950 ? i have both sitting
>> in an angle there.
>> I know the IIfx is working with Linux because i had it, but i found BSD more
>> efficient than linux (and besides Linus Torvalds said OS X is shit) so i
>> preferred the former if possible.
> 
> If Linus said that, he's either uninformed, jealous, stupid or all three.
> OS X is the first Unix that works as well for a total computer neophyte as
> it does for a geek like myself. I use it in my office, and if it were a
> bit more stable on Sonnet G3 OldWorld Macs, I'd be using it at home.
> 
> Sorry for the OT.